Sonicx9 wrote:Second, my problem with both PS4 and Xbox One is not many exclusives, especially if you have a gaming PC, PS3, Xbox 360, PS Vita, 3DS, and a Nintendo Switch. So in my case thr Nintendo Switch fit me perfectly as I do not like dealing with PC gaming headaches or even the PS4 and Xbox One headaches of long installs and long patch downloads and installs, and I am not a fan of the Dualshock 4 because you have to use the awkward touch pad and not the share button to do select unlike the Nintendo Switch with seaperate buttons. That is why I take Switch over PS4 and Xbox One any day of the week and I am not alone, as Rich of ReviewTechUSA and especially Dave the Video Game Critic himself 100% agree on!

Oh, so if you have every single platform other than a PS4 or Xbox One the number of unique games available for each goes down? Good to know...

The Xbox One may not have many true exclusives because much of what it has comes out on PC, but the PS4 absolutely does. I think their first party output rivals Nintendo's for quality, and they get a good number of exclusive third party games too.

Rev wrote:Main thing I have to say is be careful about speaking for other people when they have not responded to this particular thread. If they want to be involved in this conversation they can speak for themselves.

Well said, Rev. This was my main takeaway when I first started reading this thread.

I, for one, don't like it when others try to put words in my mouth. I doubt many of us out there do enjoy such a thing.

I typically try and stay away from "Vs." topics such as this. I could not possibly care less about the subject matter of the article referenced in the original post. The main reason I frequent this site, and stay active on the forums, is that I feel like it's a relatively safe online community, especially compared to other sites out there that are dedicated to gaming.

I love the attention given to older games that I may or may not have played, and it's interesting to have someone else's perspective on newer titles, as well. It's a review site, first and foremost, and that's what keeps me coming back. While I don't mind others expressing their opinions (quite the opposite, actually - I welcome it!) I feel like the best way to handle someone else's opinion is to respect it, above all else.

I have no idea who the author of the initial article is, and as others have stated, I have no idea whether or not he is biased towards one video game company or another. I also have no idea how The Critic would interpret the article, and would make no claims about his opinion. There are plenty of people on the Internet who see things differently than myself, and the last thing I would ever try to do is label them, or to claim that I know the way they would think. If nothing else, it's the polite thing to do.

I can only hope that others out there would be treated with the same courtesy.

Also, you have two huge upcoming exclusives in the form of Last of Us II and Spider-Man. Really, though, the importance of PS4’s multi-platform titles shouldn’t be understated. When a big game is announced for Switch, it’s celebrated, but it’s pretty much a given when it comes to PS4. Kingdom Hearts III, Red Dead Redemption II, the next four Call of Duty games, Assassin’s Creed, Madden, Metal Gear, Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy? They’re not exclusives, but they’re all important franchises and there is no question that they will come to PS4. Nintendo hasn’t seen a new Madden in years (no big loss, in my opinion).

Switch is awesome, but I still prefer my PS4, because I know that (outside of Nintendo’s pen properties) I won’t be missing anything. Third parties still aren’t supporting Switch like they should.

Agreed, people forget how many exclusives Sony consoles have. Several are top tier. Third party content, particularly the big budget releases, end up on the Playstation. Most do not end up on Nintendo. The Switch is a fantastic second console option, as a primary option against Sony, I have to say the odds are stacked against it.

Yep. The difference between Nintendo and Sony is that third party developers will take the occasional big-budget risk on PlayStation. When is the last time that happened on a Nintendo console (Bayonetta doesn’t count)? Probably Mondter Hunter Tri, or Dragon Quest X in Japan,and I remember reading something about Capcom’s reasoning behind it: 1). It would cost too much money to develop it for PS3, and 2). Wii had a substantial install base.

I’m glad that Nintendo isn’t competing directly, but a part of me wishes that they would. I think that they misread Gamecube’s failure. If they would have included dvd playback, and if they would have done a better job promoting it, it could have been more successful. I mean, it did receive better third party support than the N64!

Just a theory here that Nintendo is not about competing with Sony and MS, but about sharing in a healthy diverse marketplace

I think its less about what happened in the past for Nintendo's consoles, and just about a conscious decision to not engage in an expensive technical race with giants like Sony and Microsoft. The more games that are shared between a Nintendo console and a Sony or MS console, the better Sony and MS will look - because looks are what Sony and MS promote. Nintendo has been able to build a dedicated fanbase that will open their wallets, wait through the droughts, and be excited about Nintendo games and Nintendo's focus on other things that people enjoy, including nostalgia. In this way, Nintendo has somewhat partitioned the gaming market into submarkets. The focus is less on direct competition, but on a sort of sideways competition where a competitors success can even be a good thing if it helps the market as a whole

Seriously, that's success. Maybe its us gamers who fell that all of these games and consoles are in competition for the same gaming dollars, when maybe that's not really the case. Are all television shows really in competition for the same viewers? Not really, in that the market is chopped up into different overlapping viewerships. Is every band or book author or restaurant in competition? Not really. Is every superhero movie in competition? Not really - in fact, every good movie helps overcome a bad movie by helping the market of 'superhero movies' in general.

To some extent competitors all have an interest in keeping a marketplace healthy. Marvel and DC comics need each other to keep the comic book business healthy. The movie industry needs a steady stream of successful movies, from whatever distributor, to keep the industry healthy. Nintendo, Sony and MS may actually gain something by having people buy any gaming products at all - to the extent they are serving different submarkets. Even where Sony and MS compete for the same gamers and dollars, they at least get a secondary benefit that more games will still be developed.

Rev wrote:Main thing I have to say is be careful about speaking for other people when they have not responded to this particular thread. If they want to be involved in this conversation they can speak for themselves.

Well said, Rev. This was my main takeaway when I first started reading this thread.

I, for one, don't like it when others try to put words in my mouth. I doubt many of us out there do enjoy such a thing.

I typically try and stay away from "Vs." topics such as this. I could not possibly care less about the subject matter of the article referenced in the original post. The main reason I frequent this site, and stay active on the forums, is that I feel like it's a relatively safe online community, especially compared to other sites out there that are dedicated to gaming.

I love the attention given to older games that I may or may not have played, and it's interesting to have someone else's perspective on newer titles, as well. It's a review site, first and foremost, and that's what keeps me coming back. While I don't mind others expressing their opinions (quite the opposite, actually - I welcome it!) I feel like the best way to handle someone else's opinion is to respect it, above all else.

I have no idea who the author of the initial article is, and as others have stated, I have no idea whether or not he is biased towards one video game company or another. I also have no idea how The Critic would interpret the article, and would make no claims about his opinion. There are plenty of people on the Internet who see things differently than myself, and the last thing I would ever try to do is label them, or to claim that I know the way they would think. If nothing else, it's the polite thing to do.

I can only hope that others out there would be treated with the same courtesy.

I just mention it because the article does not mention the PS4 flaws unlike critic who will point them out right away!

BanjoPickles wrote:Man, even though I am a fan of the Switch, I would still recommend PS4. Switch has a few great exclusives, but don’t kid yourself by thinking that it trumps PS4, which has:

Also, you have two huge upcoming exclusives in the form of Last of Us II and Spider-Man. Really, though, the importance of PS4’s multi-platform titles shouldn’t be understated. When a big game is announced for Switch, it’s celebrated, but it’s pretty much a given when it comes to PS4. Kingdom Hearts III, Red Dead Redemption II, the next four Call of Duty games, Assassin’s Creed, Madden, Metal Gear, Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy? They’re not exclusives, but they’re all important franchises and there is no question that they will come to PS4. Nintendo hasn’t seen a new Madden in years (no big loss, in my opinion).

Switch is awesome, but I still prefer my PS4, because I know that (outside of Nintendo’s pen properties) I won’t be missing anything. Third parties still aren’t supporting Switch like they should.

You did good listing many exclusives but all of them are Sony PlayStation 1st party games FYI, I do not count Ni Nu Kuni II because it is on the PC day and date with PS4, Yakuza 6 will hit PC in the near future, Street Fighter V is on the PC and that game is a mess even to this day thanks to loot boxes!: https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018 ... loot-boxes, Nier: Automata is on PC and Xbox One so that does not count at all. But even then you got 14 actual exclusives so not bad!

DrLitch wrote:Agreed, people forget how many exclusives Sony consoles have. Several are top tier. Third party content, particularly the big budget releases, end up on the Playstation. Most do not end up on Nintendo. The Switch is a fantastic second console option, as a primary option against Sony, I have to say the odds are stacked against it.

You are not wrong that is the only reason for me to get a PS4 for Sony PlayStation 1st party games, but most of what I am interested on PS4 is 3rd party stuff that hit either the Switch or PC or both, but even though I do not like PC gaming because it makes me frustrated. So Switch is my go to choice.

BanjoPickles wrote:Yep. The difference between Nintendo and Sony is that third party developers will take the occasional big-budget risk on PlayStation. When is the last time that happened on a Nintendo console (Bayonetta doesn’t count)? Probably Mondter Hunter Tri, or Dragon Quest X in Japan,and I remember reading something about Capcom’s reasoning behind it: 1). It would cost too much money to develop it for PS3, and 2). Wii had a substantial install base.

I’m glad that Nintendo isn’t competing directly, but a part of me wishes that they would. I think that they misread Gamecube’s failure. If they would have included dvd playback, and if they would have done a better job promoting it, it could have been more successful. I mean, it did receive better third party support than the N64!

One 3rd party risk is the upcoming Daemon x Machina which looks awesome!

scotland wrote:Just a theory here that Nintendo is not about competing with Sony and MS, but about sharing in a healthy diverse marketplace

I think its less about what happened in the past for Nintendo's consoles, and just about a conscious decision to not engage in an expensive technical race with giants like Sony and Microsoft. The more games that are shared between a Nintendo console and a Sony or MS console, the better Sony and MS will look - because looks are what Sony and MS promote. Nintendo has been able to build a dedicated fanbase that will open their wallets, wait through the droughts, and be excited about Nintendo games and Nintendo's focus on other things that people enjoy, including nostalgia. In this way, Nintendo has somewhat partitioned the gaming market into submarkets. The focus is less on direct competition, but on a sort of sideways competition where a competitors success can even be a good thing if it helps the market as a whole

Seriously, that's success. Maybe its us gamers who fell that all of these games and consoles are in competition for the same gaming dollars, when maybe that's not really the case. Are all television shows really in competition for the same viewers? Not really, in that the market is chopped up into different overlapping viewerships. Is every band or book author or restaurant in competition? Not really. Is every superhero movie in competition? Not really - in fact, every good movie helps overcome a bad movie by helping the market of 'superhero movies' in general.

To some extent competitors all have an interest in keeping a marketplace healthy. Marvel and DC comics need each other to keep the comic book business healthy. The movie industry needs a steady stream of successful movies, from whatever distributor, to keep the industry healthy. Nintendo, Sony and MS may actually gain something by having people buy any gaming products at all - to the extent they are serving different submarkets. Even where Sony and MS compete for the same gamers and dollars, they at least get a secondary benefit that more games will still be developed.

Yes, along with every other "war" you manage to dream up and freak out about. It's games that are about taking sides, not the game industry. Nobody gives a crap whether you buy a Switch or a PS4, and you shouldn't give a crap about what they buy either – people purchase what they decide to purchase because it's what they want, not you. I can't think of a more useless thing to waste your time and energy on.

Yes, along with every other "war" you manage to dream up and freak out about. It's games that are about taking sides, not the game industry. Nobody gives a crap whether you buy a Switch or a PS4, and you shouldn't give a crap about what they buy either – people purchase what they decide to purchase because it's what they want, not you. I can't think of a more useless thing to waste your time and energy on.

So just buy for the systems you like and ignore the systems you do not like then, is that correct?